Annual Performance Reviews

Body
Sections
Column Content
Text

OAA Policy on Reviews

The Office of Academic Affairs maintains the policy on faculty annual reviews.

Visit the OAA Policy on Reviews [pdf]

Column Content
Text

Timeline & Guidelines

The following guidelines provide information about the annual review process for tenure-track, research and clinical faculty in the college. Annual reviews for associated faculty should be conducted in accordance with individual units’ Appointments, Promotion and Tenure (APT) documents.

This information is listed below and available for download: 

Column Content
Text

• February 1, 2019: suggested deadline for faculty to submit annual review materials to chairs and directors

• March 1, 2019: suggested deadline to solicit annual review letters for faculty supported through Discovery Themes (DT) funding from DT focus area leaders

• April 2, 2019: deadline for fourth-year review dossiers for assistant professors and clinical/research faculty reappointments to be submitted to the college

• April 30, 2019: suggested target date for completing annual review meetings

• May 31, 2019: deadline to report any non-renewals of assistant professors to the Office of Academic Affairs (non-renewals require a Fourth Year Review process)

• July 1, 2019: deadline for copies of annual reviews for all assistant, associate and full professors to be submitted to the college (except fourth-year reviews)

Text

At a minimum, all faculty members must report on activities conducted in the period between Jan. 1 and Dec. 31 (see important dates section for recommended dates), and provide an updated CV.

Assistant professors are expected to maintain a cumulative core dossier and to submit that dossier as part of the annual review. This year it is optional to use the Vita system (vita.osu.edu) for annual reviews as the university transitions away from Research in View; the dossiers may be prepared in Word or any other desired format. It is strongly recommended that ALL annual reviews of assistant professors include the full set of information that is reported in the core dossier.

Associate and full professors are required to submit information about teaching and advising; curriculum and course development; publications and scholarly presentations; funding/grants; outreach and service; and honors and awards. In general, this information mirrors the categories that are on the core dossier outline for promotion and tenure reviews. A template using this outline is available. Units may adapt this template in line with departmental Appointments, Promotion and Tenure (APT) policies and practices as long as the basic information is included. Associate professors who are planning for promotion may also submit a cumulative core dossier (prepared either through Vita or as a Word doc that follows the core dossier structure), to assist in evaluation of progress toward promotion; specific details about screening processes in individual departments and schools are spelled out in their respective APT documents.

Text
  • To review and follow the procedures for annual review outlined in the unit’s APT document.
  • To issue a call to the faculty to submit annual review materials in time to meet the deadlines above. See targeted deadline in important dates section.
  • To meet with each faculty member and write a summary letter that evaluates the performance over the past year and gives guidance about future goals, and, in the case of assistant and associate professors, about progress toward tenure and/or promotion. A designee (e.g., the chair of the departmental promotion and tenure committee) may provide a review letter and carry out the face-to-face meeting as long as the chair provides a finalized signed review letter.
  • In cases where the faculty has joint appointments, to consult with the head of the other unit (or Discovery Theme Focus Area leader, as appropriate) in line with existing MOUs and unit APT documents.
  • To remind faculty members that they have the opportunity to comment in writing on the review.
  • To maintain the review letter and any comments in the faculty member’s departmental personnel file.
Column Content
Text

Annual Activity Report Template

This template mirrors the outline of the OAA core dossier. It can be edited or modified by chairs to include other information as long as it covers the general categories below. Activities should be listed for the period Jan. 1 through Dec. 31 of the current year. Faculty should omit categories for which there is no activity to report.

Download here: 

 

Column Content
Text

Discovery Themes Faculty Review Process

The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for Discovery Theme (DT) faculty members includes a requirement for input from the DT focus area leader in the faculty review process. This requires a clear statement of the expectations for faculty participation in the DT mission.

This information is listed below and available for download: 

Column Content
Text

Within 6 months of date of hire, a face-to-face meeting of the faculty member, TIU head, and DT focus area leader will establish goals and expectations. A document summarizing this discussion, co-signed by all three, should be included in the faculty member’s personnel file and as an appendix to the annual review letter (see below). The annual review letters then become part of the dossier for 4th year reviews and tenure and/or promotion reviews.

Text

The annual review process for DT faculty members in ASC will proceed as follows (with the exception of probationary assistant professors undergoing their fourth year review):

  1. February 1: deadline for faculty member to submit annual activity report to the department
  2. March 1: deadline for TIU head to send the annual report to and solicit written input from the DT focus area leader on whether the faculty member’s performance aligns with the stated goals and expectations (attach statement of goals to solicitation)
  3. March 31: deadline for DTI leader to provide written feedback to TIU head
  4. July 2: deadline to upload copies of annual review letters to the college Buckeye Box designated for this purpose. As they write their annual reviews, chairs and directors should take into consideration the comments of the DT faculty leaders, whether written or oral. In addition, chairs and directors should append to their own review letters:
    1. any written input from the DT focus leader (letter or e-mail); and
    2. the goals and expectation document.
  5. All three documents should be sent by the chair to the faculty member; retained in the faculty member’s personnel file; and uploaded as a single file into the appropriate Annual Review folder on the college’s Box.
  6. ASC will check annual review files submitted to the college, and if no DT input is included, the vice dean will send a final request to the DT focus area leader. No response from the DT focus area leader will be considered a positive review.
Text

The annual review for DT faculty members in ASC who are in the 4th year review process will follow a modified schedule:

  1. February 1: deadline for faculty member to submit core dossier to the department
  2. February 15: deadline for TIU head to send the core dossier to and solicit written input from the DT focus area leader on whether the faculty member’s performance aligns with the stated goals and expectations; the solicitation letter should be included in the core dossier as verification that input was solicited if no written input is received
  3. March 1: suggested deadline for DT focus area leader to provide written feedback to TIU head for inclusion in the core dossier (placed in the Internal Review Evaluation section 2.3, now placed at near the end of the dossier); date can be adjusted as needed to align with scheduled meetings of the eligible faculty
  4. April 3: deadline for submission of 4th year dossiers to ASC
  5. ASC will check annual review files submitted to the College, and if no DT input is included, will send a final request to the DT focus area leader. No response from the DT focus area leader will be considered a positive review.